By Ravi Bhatia-Talk Radio News Service

During his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder defended his decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, through the federal court system in New York rather than through military commissions.

President Barack Obama revived former President George W. Bush’s military commissions, also known as military tribunals, in May 2009 for a small number of Guantanamo Bay detainees. Obama’s tribunals, deemed “Bush Light” by critics, provided terror suspects and war prisoners with more legal protections. However, the tribunals have been criticized for sacrificing American judicial values in order to prosecute prisoners quicker.

In his argument for employing federal courts rather than military courts, Holder cited the 300 convicted international and domestic terrorists currently in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons. He claimed that the United States could prosecute terrorists “safely and securely” in the federal system because “we have been doing it for years.”

“I studied this issue extensively,” Holder said in his opening statements. “I consulted the Secretary of Defense. I heard from prosecutors from my Department and from the Defense Department’s Office of Military Commissions. I spoke to victims on both sides of the question. And at the end of the day, it was clear to me that the venue in which we are most likely to obtain justice for the American people is in the federal court.”

While Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) defended Holder, saying that “we can rely on the American justice system,” the decision was met with criticism from Republican members of the committee. In one instance, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called Holder’s choice “a perversion of the justice system.”

“You’re a fine man,” Graham said to Holder. “I know you want to do everything to help this country be safe but I think you’ve made a fundamental mistake here.”

Senator Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) mentioned that Mohammed had already said he would plead guilty to the terrorists acts.

“How could you be more likely to get a conviction in federal court when Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has already asked to plead guilty before military commission and be executed?” Kyl asked, garnering scattered applause and laughter from some audience members. “How can you be more likely to get a conviction in an Article III [federal] court than that?”

In response, Holder said, “the determination I make … does not depend on the whims or the desires of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. He said he wanted to do that then. I have no idea with what he wants to do now with regards to these military commissions that now [have] enhanced protections. My job is to look at the possibilities.”

Holder also touched on issues such as prison reform legislation, claiming that drug courts specifically established for non-violent crimes have so far been effective, responding to Senator Al Franken’s (D-Minn.) opinion that too many prisoners were in prison for drug possession.

“We’re essentially [taking] kids who are in possession of drugs and sending them to crime school,” Franken said. “They learn from other criminals how to do crime, and two-thirds of them come back [after] they’re released within three years.”

“I’m familiar with the [drug court] we have here in Washington, D.C…. that has [proven] to be very successful in dealing with people who are selling drugs because they are addicted to drugs,” Holder said. “These are low level dealers, not the people who live in penthouses and drive big cars and all that.”

Holder recommended a data driven analysis of the U.S. prison system. He said that a “sentencing group” is looking at a “wide variety” of issues in U.S. prisons.

“Who is in jail?” Holder asked. “Are they in jail for appropriate amounts of time? Is the amount of time they spend in jail a deterrent? Does that have an impact on the recidivism rate? This group will be reporting back to me within the next couple of months. It is on that basis that we’ll be formulating policy and working with the Committee.”

By Meagan Wiseley, University of New Mexico-Talk Radio News Service

Three provisions of the USA Patriot Act are set to expire Dec. 31, 2009 and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman, Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), intends to reauthorize the expiring provisions, but with sunset provisions to ensure the protection of Americans’ civil liberties.

According to a statement from Sen. Leahy the USA Patriot Act Sunset Extension Act mandates new audits by the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General on the use of National Security Letters, or federal subpoenas used by a variety of law enforcement entities.

Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Justice, Glenn Fine, said, “our reports … found the FBI had engaged in serious misuse of NSLs… we found that the FBI had issued many NSLs without proper authorization and had made improper requests under the statutes cited in the NSLs.”

The Office of the Inspector General is still reluctant to conclude that the FBI has fully eliminated all the problems that were found. Fine suggested that while congress is considering reauthorizing provisions of the Patriot Act “it must ensure through continual and aggressive oversight that the FBI uses these important and and intrusive investigative authorities appropriately.”

Leahy believes that comprehensive audits performed by Congress will help hold the FBI accountable for the organization’s NSL use.

Senate Democrats celebrate the 68-31 vote that confirmed Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court. August 6, 2009

Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) joined representatives of various civil rights organization in a press conference Wednesday to discuss the historic nomination and upcoming Senate vote of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

By Courtney Ann Jackson-Talk Radio News Service

Civil rights organizations voiced their support of Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor just one day after the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 13-6 to confirm her nomination.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) joined representatives of various organizations in a press conference Wednesday to discuss the historic nomination and upcoming Senate vote.

Leadership Conference on Civil Rights President Wade Henderson said, “Her elevation to the Supreme Court would mark another advance on the road to equal opportunity that this nation has traveled from its founding; but, even more importantly, it would give Americans a Justice they can be confident will uphold their constitutional values, the rule of law and the principle of equal justice for all.”

Lillian Rodriguez Lopez of the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda spoke about Sotomayor from both a professional and a personal perspective. Lopez fought back tears as she explained that while she, too, is a Hispanic woman from New York, she could only “pray to possess” the qualities and skills that Sotomayor possesses.

“I hope that next week that the members of the entire Senate will send a message of resounding support for Judge Sotomayor to the American people, to the Hispanic American people, when they vote for her confirmation,” said Lopez.

Reid said he is currently trying to cut a deal with Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) regarding the floor debate, but isn’t certain on how long the debate may last. He dismissed Republicans’ concerns over Sotomayor, asking rhetorically, “How many times do we have to listen to the same speeches on the same brief statements she made, on the same case that she talked about?”

Reid added that the Senate will be working long hours to ensure that the confirmation vote is one of the last things they do before they leave for the August recess.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)says he’s disappointed that the Republicans have decided to postpone the Sotomayor confirmation vote but he says they have that right.

Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee say they find Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be qualified for a position on the Supreme Court.

“Show respect to our third branch of government,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT), urging people to respect U.S. Supreme Court’s confirmation hearing of Judge Sonia Sotomayor regardless of whether people agree or disagree with the nomination. (0:37)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:37m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

Regarding Arlen Specter changing parties, Congressman Joe Sestak (D-Penn.) said that it’s better for the constituents of Pennsylvania to decide which candidate should win the primary. He feels like the Democratic National Party backing Specter may be giving him too much of an advantage in the Pennsylvania primary. President Barack Obama and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) have already committed to personally supporting Specter in his 2010 election. (00:47)

 

 Standard Podcast [00:47m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

Senator Arlen Specter
Photo by Michael Ruhl

Senator Arlen Specter (Penn.) says that he left the Republican Party because they had stuck their nose into party affairs to the point of breeding extremism. Ironically the Democrats are doing the exact same thing to their newest member. Micromanaging from the highest level doesn’t seem to be exclusive to the Republicans.

Yesterday Specter walked away from the party he has been with for nearly four decades, because he felt they were ignoring moderate voice. Specter announced his decision to defect to the Democratic Party, only the twenty-first time that a Senator has done such a thing since 1890.

President Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) have both said they will fully support Specter in his 2010 election, but Congressman Joe Sestak (D-Penn.) was not sure that the party establishment should be backing Specter in this way.

“If decisions and candidates are being chosen in Washington, you may just reemphasize that divisive barrier that’s between the parties,” Sestak said. “I think we cannot afford to have a decision that is so important to Pennsylvanians be decided by the party establishment,” and that the voters should be the ones to choose their candidate.

Sestak is rumored to be considering running for the Pennsylvania Senate seat, and would come up against Specter in the Democratic primary. When asked directly, Sestak said he had not decided yet whether or not he would run. Another contender, Representative Allyson Schwartz (D-Penn.) said today that she would not run for the seat.

The republican response has ranged from anger to confusion. Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steel likened Specter to Benedict Arnold.

“Clearly, this was an act based on political expediency by a craven politician desperate to keep his Washington power base – not the act of a statesman,” Steel said. “Arlen Specter handed Barack Obama and his band of radical leftists nearly absolute power in the United States Senate.”

Specter responded, “I have not represented the Republican Party, I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.” He was referencing the fact that in the past months there has been an exodus from the Republican Party in Pennsylvania, where over 100,000 individuals changed their party registration from Republican to Democrat.

Specter is defending his position as being one of riding with the tides of his constituency, instead of bowing to the will of a national political party. Critics see it as a survival move of a desperate politician.

Speaking today with President Barack Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden, Specter said that staying in the Senate would allow him to carry forward important initiatives for his constituents, speaking specifically about expanding medical research.

Specter would prove to be the 60 Democrat in the Senate, provided that comedian Al Franken prevails in his court case for the Minnesota Senate. Sixty votes, called a supermajority, is enough to override a Republican filibuster. Specter said previously, though, that he was not going to simply back the Democrats automatically, and President Obama acknowledged that, saying, “I don’t expect Arlen to be a rubber stamp.” According to Obama, he and Specter agree in the areas of health care, education, medical research